The Syndicate

Domino wrote:Idk if Phoenix is good or not, but I def think the sun thing could be a reference to her as well. Phoenix was formed when the X Men were in space and the spirit of the Phoenix (a fire bird) possessed Jean Grey's body. So, if Prof X was trying to reference a clue, it's either vote. Phoenix or Sunfire out. We have to be cautious though for manipulation and try to get it right this time. We've lost too many civ teammates the past 3 days already

I think this is kinda far-fetched. Sunfire must be the reference, right? And keep in mind it's only 1 player's opinion.

agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

@Vision, have you explained why you chose to go with Cable over someone with votes that would actually help out number half of Quicksilver's votes? I still do not get this considering you were the main person to bring up Magneto's power and were set on fighting it (which I have no problem with!). My problem lies within the fact that I don't feel your vote actually HELPED fight it.

LINKI: I agree. Prof X would have been foolish to use the word Sun. I need to reread his role again to see if this is one of those roles where he can have night information or if it's a role where you can announce your opinions in the thread, I forget.

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

Hawkeye wrote:

Spiral wrote: What exactly would you like me to answer that Rasputin didn't also ask of me?

I was just curious very curious about your reaction to my discussing Storm's role, among others, and if you did indeed consider I endangered her or another civilian, what would the circumstances for that be. I was also wondering about your reply (the one where I was very disappointed in you :P), because my post was pretty big and you just chose those elements that seemed to suit your cause ignoring the rest. Can you elaborate on that a bit?

I do not think discussing the secrets of a civvie role is beneficial to the civvies at all. This is not a new opinion. Unless the role has a possible traitor ability.
Even so, it is not novel to think discussing civvie secrets is not intelligent. I don't think it is. Why give the baddies more power? Why give them that knowledge/idea? It's not like your discussion of it helped the civilian cause in any way-- it only gave baddies access to those ideas. I'll repeat again THIS IS NOT A NEW THING. I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP FOR THIS GAME. FLYIN' HIGH HAS BEEN LYNCHED (wrongly) for this.
I do not appreciate the way you turned my shock that someone would discuss the secrets of a civvie role into a reason to suspect me.


Now:

Hawkeye wrote:

Spiral wrote: Why the hell are you discussing the secrets of a civilian role?

I believe it’s called trying to be helpful. See, I would normally agree with you if I concluded that my brief discussion would result in endangering said civilian or any other civilians for that matter, but having weighed the pros and cons of such an undertaking, I considered that openly discussing it, along with the rest of the roles with secrets would provide us a better understanding of the game mechanics. If you manage to provide a setting where the fact that I discussed Storm’s secret endangers any civilian (note that this is a game with heavy voting manipulation, so a lynch switch or whatever would go undetected), I’ll plead guilty and you can go ahead and take me out for attempting to endanger or expose one or more civilians. Let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that ‘altering the weather’ does indeed mean what I have described in my previous post. Do you think that a team of 7 would not reach the same conclusion, because you know, it’s pretty much common sense? Or maybe you guys haven’t discussed it this yet, in which case I do apologize. Do you think that a person who survives a lynch would not be an automatic night target either because they are a powerful civilian or to have the baddies check if they do indeed have Apocalypse in the bag? Of course you’d think the same if you actually took a few seconds to rationalize this, instead of trying to come across as very offended and self-righteous in what I consider an aggressive manner. I would buy it if you were Storm and you’d consider that my discussing your secrets could somehow expose you. However, the very fact that out of my entire post you’ve chosen to single out one role in particular to make you look good, tells me that you have nothing to do with that particular, and perhaps the reason is that I might have struck a chord and I’m exposing you or one of your teammates. I see no discussion about the independents and the baddie with secrets, for which you are very welcome. In case you haven’t bothered to read my posts, I like to rely on logic, common sense and what facts I can pick up from people’s posts in order to make what I consider rational judgments. Plus, I like to get some reactions. Thank you for that. And if it’s all right with you, I’ll have to keep an eye on you.

I don't know what you want me to say about this? You chastised me for daring to question you. I think your reasons for "suspecting" me for this are shitty. I think you accused me of being bad simply because I dared say, "wtf" to you. I do not see anything wrong with what I said to you, but I see everything wrong with what you did: WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU OPENLY DISCUSS THE SECRETS OF A CIVILIAN ROLE? What benefit did it give anyone???????

If you're looking for me to have a change of heart on this-- it's not happening. You condemned me for questioning you, and then you were extremely condescending (so I don't want to hear bullshit about me causing you to act in any way). "I like to rely on logic"
Cool!

Hawkeye wrote:

Spiral wrote:

Hawkeye wrote:

Spiral wrote: Why the hell are you discussing the secrets of a civilian role?

I believe it’s called trying to be helpful. See, I would normally agree with you if I concluded that my brief discussion would result in endangering said civilian or any other civilians for that matter, but having weighed the pros and cons of such an undertaking, I considered that openly discussing it, along with the rest of the roles with secrets would provide us a better understanding of the game mechanics. If you manage to provide a setting where the fact that I discussed Storm’s secret endangers any civilian (note that this is a game with heavy voting manipulation, so a lynch switch or whatever would go undetected), I’ll plead guilty and you can go ahead and take me out for attempting to endanger or expose one or more civilians. Let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that ‘altering the weather’ does indeed mean what I have described in my previous post. Do you think that a team of 7 would not reach the same conclusion, because you know, it’s pretty much common sense? Or maybe you guys haven’t discussed it this yet, in which case I do apologize. Do you think that a person who survives a lynch would not be an automatic night target either because they are a powerful civilian or to have the baddies check if they do indeed have Apocalypse in the bag? Of course you’d think the same if you actually took a few seconds to rationalize this, instead of trying to come across as very offended and self-righteous in what I consider an aggressive manner. I would buy it if you were Storm and you’d consider that my discussing your secrets could somehow expose you. However, the very fact that out of my entire post you’ve chosen to single out one role in particular to make you look good, tells me that you have nothing to do with that particular, and perhaps the reason is that I might have struck a chord and I’m exposing you or one of your teammates. I see no discussion about the independents and the baddie with secrets, for which you are very welcome. In case you haven’t bothered to read my posts, I like to rely on logic, common sense and what facts I can pick up from people’s posts in order to make what I consider rational judgments. Plus, I like to get some reactions. Thank you for that. And if it’s all right with you, I’ll have to keep an eye on you.

That being said, I don’t want to end this post in a bellicose manner.

Very nice way of saying you suspect me because I dared question you. In addition, the other role you discussed was Mystique-- a baddie role.

You have no idea how disappointed I am in this reply. If this is all you got from my post then I can only conclude that you either are not capable of properly comprehending what I've said (of course, this can also be my fault for not phrasing my thoughts more accurately), you haven't read everything I've written or you have picked whatever suited your cause.

Because I'm in a very good at the moment, I'll give you a tl;dr

- you have asked me a question and I have answered it;
- I have asked you to give me a setting in which my discussing Storm's role would endanger a civilian;
- the way in which you phrased said question was not to my liking because I quote " [you] come across as very offended and self-righteous in what I consider an aggressive manner."

Anyone is free to ask me anything and question my decisions or my reasoning. The reason I decided to keep an eye on you was the way in which you've chosen to do that. I'm still in an excellent mood, so I'll give you an example which would not have made me look at you: 'Interesting post, Hawkeye. I noticed you have decided to discuss a civilian's secrets along with those of the independents and the baddie, and I do not think that is a good idea because [...]. Would you mind telling me why you decided to do that?'

See the difference? See why your tone would make me want to look at you? See why your reply to mine would make me want to take an even closer look at you? You decide to specifically choose just the bit where I suspect you for 'daring' to ask me a question and omit to mention my discussion about ALL of the independents. Of course I would start suspecting you. Wouldn't you?

#1) I brought up Mystique because YOU asked why I hadn't commented on the other role(s) you discussed. The other roles you discussed were not civilian roles, so I saw no reason not to discuss them. I was not trying to insinuate anything by pointing out Mystique, only that the other roles you discussed were not civilian and I felt no need to mention them on that basis. However, you conveniently ignored this and told me I was bad for doing so.


What would you even like me to respond to, Hawkeye, because it seems to me that you just want me to say that I'm bad. I am not. You don't have points against me, you have complaints. You don't have a case against me that I can respond to because everything you're saying is just "I do not like your tone" or "Why did you ask me this" with an aire of "I am smarter than you". So, Hawkeye, please, tell me, why am I bad? Am I bad because I thought you discussing secret civvie roles was obtuse? Am I bad because I thought Quicksilver was bad? Am I bad because I didn't like how I thought the original Rasputin was trying to seem like a civvie not paying attention? Or am I bad because it is convenient for you to say so?

Phoenix wrote: None taken! I do see your point. However, I just found it to be a rather tenuous argument and very panicky from many people who may or may not have been trying to split up votes for the Magneto argument (it makes my head hurt!), and I happened to be the scapegoat. What I'm trying to decide is if

a) those who switched their votes in the last minute to me were genuinely trying to save the (as it is clear now good) Quicksilver by putting votes on me with the tenuous feelings argument, or

b) if they were baddies trying to fearmonger by putting suspicion on me while allowing enough votes for QS to be lynched, thereby attempting to kill two birds with one stone.

I'm leaning towards the first argument, and at this point I'm not inclined to vote to lynch those who were genuinely trying to save QS (as much I feel betrayed by my fellows. Sigh). They were (wrongly) guessing I was a baddie, so they clearly don't know who the baddies actually are. I suppose some could also be Indys, now that I think about it. Others have made an interesting argument about looking at people who voted QS early and stayed with him, but I'm not so sure about that either, as I voted for him and genuinely thought he was a baddie. I'll have to think on this more.

Glad that you're not offended. I'm always scared to accuse people of not being sincere, it hurts some peoples feelings!
As for the suspicion, perhaps some people were just tagging along to make you look suspicious but I personally was not, I found you suspicious before the whole voting even happened. I'll be interested to the conclusions you make, because if I am being honest I'm concerned that you don't really have any strong thoughts coming out of this. But I am willing to wait and see because I know some players take time and I don't want to jump too fast where I stop a civvie from actually reaching their potential if that makes sense. I just feel like I have at least some leads to look at in terms of certain players. What do you think about Sunfire? The switch from him to you?

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

I'm slightly concerned at how you came into the game and now suspect the two people who were alternative lynching options to Quicksilver. While I suspect them myself, it feels like you might be going with the flow. I'll have to read your previous posts, I haven't fully caught up.

I've been pinged by both of Domino's recent back to back posts. The first about phoenix just sounds odd. I think it's pretty obvious that Professor X was talking about Sunfire. Positing that sun actually meant Phoenix comes off as someone trying to get eyes away from Sunfire. Not saying that is what was happening as that would be pretty bold for Domino to be defending a team mate in such as obvious way, but that is how it read to me. And then the 2nd post about where the Sentinel kill came from that didn't even point out the secrets in the role also pinged me. And why would The Sentinels being recruited give them a kill?

Havok wrote:I've been pinged by both of Domino's recent back to back posts. The first about phoenix just sounds odd. I think it's pretty obvious that Professor X was talking about Sunfire. Positing that sun actually meant Phoenix comes off as someone trying to get eyes away from Sunfire. Not saying that is what was happening as that would be pretty bold for Domino to be defending a team mate in such as obvious way, but that is how it read to me. And then the 2nd post about where the Sentinel kill came from that didn't even point out the secrets in the role also pinged me. And why would The Sentinels being recruited give them a kill?

I didn't see the Secret part, I saw the voting power for Sentinels. And I also said, maybe someone who recently won a poll may be Sentinels and won a NK possibly? I'm just throwing out ideas just like Phoneix. Just because I suggest a possibility for scenarios, doesn't mean I'm more guilty than someone else. This is a game of deducing after all, and the last time someone had an idea (Quicksilver) you all got pinged and looked at what happened to him.

Havok wrote:I've been pinged by both of Domino's recent back to back posts. The first about phoenix just sounds odd. I think it's pretty obvious that Professor X was talking about Sunfire. Positing that sun actually meant Phoenix comes off as someone trying to get eyes away from Sunfire. Not saying that is what was happening as that would be pretty bold for Domino to be defending a team mate in such as obvious way, but that is how it read to me. And then the 2nd post about where the Sentinel kill came from that didn't even point out the secrets in the role also pinged me. And why would The Sentinels being recruited give them a kill?

On the phone AGAIN, smh. Thank god this isn't a speed game. I do not have enough time.
I agree with this, I was pinged by the post about Phoenix in addition to the fact she suspected the two major suspects or alternatives of last day. I also thought that how she started out the post was weird, by saying "I'm not sure if Phoenix is good or not". And she then said she thinks both are bad.

Domino wrote:Idk if Phoenix is good or not, but I def think the sun thing could be a reference to her as well. Phoenix was formed when the X Men were in space and the spirit of the Phoenix (a fire bird) possessed Jean Grey's body. So, if Prof X was trying to reference a clue, it's either vote. Phoenix or Sunfire out. We have to be cautious though for manipulation and try to get it right this time. We've lost too many civ teammates the past 3 days already

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

Think I am going to vote for Domino.

Sunfire wrote:RIP Dazzler

Hawkeye wrote:

Mojo wrote:
Does prof x want us to look at sun fire?

That's how I interpreted it.

C'mon Professor X. I asked for some time to prove myself.

@ those who suspect me...what is it about me? I'd like to have a chance to persuade you otherwise. I good I tell ya....good!

I can't gather the posts right now but on day 2 (I think it was?) you didn't think QS was bad so you voted one of his voters, and you didn't give an explanation as to why, it was just a thrown out vote and that did not make sense to me. Then you came back to vote QS the next day, which isn't as bad but came off strange to me.

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:I've been pinged by both of Domino's recent back to back posts. The first about phoenix just sounds odd. I think it's pretty obvious that Professor X was talking about Sunfire. Positing that sun actually meant Phoenix comes off as someone trying to get eyes away from Sunfire. Not saying that is what was happening as that would be pretty bold for Domino to be defending a team mate in such as obvious way, but that is how it read to me. And then the 2nd post about where the Sentinel kill came from that didn't even point out the secrets in the role also pinged me. And why would The Sentinels being recruited give them a kill?

I didn't see the Secret part, I saw the voting power for Sentinels. And I also said, maybe someone who recently won a poll may be Sentinels and won a NK possibly? I'm just throwing out ideas just like Phoneix. Just because I suggest a possibility for scenarios, doesn't mean I'm more guilty than someone else. This is a game of deducing after all, and the last time someone had an idea (Quicksilver) you all got pinged and looked at what happened to him.

Well, with Quicksilver his "idea" came well after any initial suspicion was on him. His theory about the baddies setting him up gave me pause. It didn't make me more suspicious of him.

Exodus wrote: Think I am going to vote for Domino.

That's a very interesting catch, sir. I'd like to hear from Domino regarding this apparent change of heart...

^I am nervous with how much I have agreed with you since I disagreed with you.

Exodus wrote:

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

I'm slightly concerned at how you came into the game and now suspect the two people who were alternative lynching options to Quicksilver. While I suspect them myself, it feels like you might be going with the flow. I'll have to read your previous posts, I haven't fully caught up.

I was thinking this the other day when Domino 2 joined us for the first time. He came in full force like he already knew what was going on, like he'd been following the thread the whole time. Maybe he is one of the deaded players.

Hmm, and then Exodus caught this which I somehow missed...

Exodus wrote:

Domino wrote:Idk if Phoenix is good or not, but I def think the sun thing could be a reference to her as well. Phoenix was formed when the X Men were in space and the spirit of the Phoenix (a fire bird) possessed Jean Grey's body. So, if Prof X was trying to reference a clue, it's either vote. Phoenix or Sunfire out. We have to be cautious though for manipulation and try to get it right this time. We've lost too many civ teammates the past 3 days already

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

Think I am going to vote for Domino.

I'm going to place my vote on Domino for now as well.

Sorry I've missed so much! Rl has been incredibly hectic for me lately and has led to no time for mafia. I'm off work today and plan to spend a lot of time catching up.

For starters, there is a particular player I plan to read up on, because with last night's death, I know he/she has to be a member of the Brotherhood. Need to go on an evidence search though.

EBWOP: Idk why I'm being so broad about it. It's Exodus btw.

Get your popcorn ready. This is going to take awhile. In light of recent events, which have informed me that Exodus has to be bad, I'm reading back to see if that allows me to pick out anything from his posts that could be telling.

Exodus wrote:

Avalanche wrote:

Spiral wrote:

The Vision wrote:Considering how many players are in this game, things are awfully quiet…

I, personally, don't have much to say. Avalanche certainly has quieted down, though.

I am pouting because I didn't get my way.

I think it is telling how people are trying to make me out as a villain for having a different opinion about the poll than everyone else. Personally, I will be looking at conformists today.

I thought I understood what you were doing when you were causing chaos, but I thought that was through once you posted this. Unless I am misinterpreting this post and your actions, you've revealed why you were talking about the Morlocks (for reasons such as analyzing reactions, which I can't disagree with). But why is it that you've only really said that you're going to be looking at conformists but have yet to actually give thoughts on the people who have villain-ized you (unless I missed them, please let me know if I have)? Or who are acting as conformists (I don't even know what that means lol). Now you're back to talking about Morlocks, and you never really accomplished what I thought you were out to do. I just don't understand.

I didn't think much of this before, but this could be interpreted as him trying to lead the lynch in a certain direction. Perhaps away from a direction that would make us look at other teammates or himself. And unsurprisingly, he voted for Mojo on Day 1 as basically a throwaway vote. Sounds like a safe/conformist option to me.

Exodus wrote:

Avalanche wrote: Hi there! I am happy to address your post.

First, I was not pushing that option to analyze reactions or anything similar. I was pushing it because I wanted to fight Morlocks. I feel like I could not have been more clear on this point.

Second, by conformists I do not mean the people villainizing me, I mean the people trying to blend in, particularly by voting for the "obvious" choice of school. You want thoughts? I'll give you thoughts.

I feel good about Scarlet Witc, despite her suspicion of me, and I feel good about Dazzler. I feel less good about Havok with a k, because I thought the pronoun thing looked scapegoaty. I haven't formed opinions of the others yet. I am watching.

Thanks for explaining. So you keep mentioning these conformists (which now I have a better understanding of what you mean) and it would not be a bad idea to look into it. But why exactly haven't you? Unless you have after this post, I haven't completely caught up. I saw you say you would be voting for someone who chose the school but again, you're not naming these players which kind of comes across like you don't want to make accusations.

At the same time you're suspecting Havok, though. I don't really agree with this accusation for the time being. The only thing I have noticed is he was very helpful at the beginning (same as Vision, I think it was?) and that could be baddies trying to look helpful and productive but Havok came across genuine to me because it sounded like he is a fan of the flavor/theme.

The most interesting part of this to me is how he is buddying up to Havok (and did so earlier). So either: 1)he's setting Havok up to be a fall-guy later on, or 2)they're teammates. Leaning more towards the second one, but we'll see what else happens as I read along.

Exodus wrote:

Mojo wrote:I was a bit confused in my earlier post about Avalanche and going to the Morlock tunnels. I have revised my opinion a bit on the matter here.

Just read the day 0 posts again and it seems that it was brought up quite a few times that Morlocks aren't necessarily bad guys, as this was pointed out numerous times to Avalanche he just ignored it, or didn't care. As he also ignored the fact that if he really wanted to fight bad guys he would go to where the brotherhoods base is actually located, not to the tunnels to fight some mutants that haven't harmed us.

So I am voting for Avalanche.

What? I am really lost at this vote. You just did a very quick turn around. You said you agreed about looking at conformists, yet ultimately, this decision is the exact opposite. I do not follow this decision. My vote may have just found its place.

I take that back. This wasn't a throwaway vote. This was a very opportunistic vote. Especially considering how many other people were suspicious on Day 1 of Avalanche with the whole Morlocks thing. I know it was a quick turn-around, but outside of that, you could use this logic to justify voting for anyone who voted for Avalanche or considered voting for him.

Edit: Apparently, Mojo had said he re-read and that was what made him change his mind. Maybe Exodus ignored that in favor of an opportunity to potentially toss someone under the bus?

That's it for Day 1. Day 2 is next, but I need to take a quick break. And then I'll be back to posting.

I fear I feel into a confirmation bias in my suspicion of White Queen, however, my suspicion does exist, just not nearly as strong as I had thought it to be.

White Queen wrote:I am not ignoring facts. You made a number of contradictory and weak statements.

So, will you be going with Deathlok, or with Rasputin? Or perhaps Avalanche?

I am not harping on you, I am stirring the pot, as it were. I am asking questions, and assessing answers. This is how I play Mafia. This kind of sounds like Avalanches post where he asks why, basically, I am picking on him.

What bothered me here was "You made a number of contradictory and weak statements"

I asked five times what was "contradictory" because I see no contradictions, really. I don't see them.
White Queen never answered me. She answered Rasputin.

HOWEVER:

White Queen wrote:I did follow the thread and I am a bit perplexed by the T-Bird surge at the end. I am not sure I even would have voted for him for that at this stage, with so many people who did not bother to vote, or post, at all. At least he did one of the two.

I thought there were some pretty good points to the case on Quicksilver (someone called him Silverfish at some point, I LOLed) and that push to T-Bird at the end did not look great to me.

There were a few things I know I have to address, and will do so tonight (xoxo Spiral ) when I have finished assuring that the mutants of the world are safe from danger

On night 2, White Queen says she would answer my query.
Then, I was silenced.
i think it's possible I was silenced so White Queen would not have to answer my question.

White Queen wrote:You know, Mikhail, you are right, I did not answer Spiral the 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5th times he asked. I did answer the first, though. I meant to remind him of my answer, thanks for the nudge.

He said that he was suspicious of YOU, Mikhail, for quick like voting to join Avalanche in the Morlock Tunnels. Did not mention a direct suspicion of Avalanche, though, or a reason that Mikhail was vote worthy, but not Avalanche. I thought this was contradictory as he suspected Mikhail for buddying up with Avalanche, but did not seem to suspect Avalanche (although he had brought up his name a few times) enough to include him in the "People I Might Vote For" short list. His subsequent explanation made sense to me, and I subsequently dropped it.

I then was silenced, and had technology issues, so kinda forgot to reply to him again.

I have already explained this, and am not sure what else Spiral wants/wanted me to say.

If this was the answer, why could it not be answered one of the five times I asked? It seems to me that White Queen made an accusation against me without base. She had no reason to say that my statements were "contradictory" because I do not see how I contradicted myself. I understand that she said I sounded sincere, but she held her conviction that I was being contradictory.


I truly thought there was more to it, but I think that I started reading everything White Queen said in a way that would fit my theory. Reading up this morning showed me that. So, I apologize for that. I have an eye on White Queen, but am unlikely to vote for her today.

Exodus you're alignment seems to be clear for your Baddie team. Everyone read Professor X's hint and you automatically try to throw the wool on people's eyes to get suspicion off her and onto me. Then, you vote for me followed by your teammate Sunfire. THAT is what I find interesting. If you were Civ I feel like you wouldn't be scrambling, especially this early when votes aren't due and already try to get someone else in the light that is Civ. After all, you campaigned well against QS to make sure attention stayed on him, why not try it on me as well now to save a Teammate of yours?

But to answer your question about Phoenix so you don't continue to throw attention back on me for not answering you and avoid you and Sunfire's attention: I felt like I was unsure when I first posted about Phoenix. Phoenix posted back after that and sounded very emotional and used the same line QS did about how "we will loose another Civ if she goes" and I didn't find that genuine. I was on the fence about her, but looking back at when she does actually post, she doesn't give much to me to now say I get Civ Vibes from her, especially the last post I just mentioned. I think the 3 I am looking at that I have a very good feeling are bad now are Sunfire, Phoenix, and Exodus. If you don't agree with me, oh well. But I'm most likely listening to the clue and voting Sunfire out first.

Shadowcat wrote:Get your popcorn ready. This is going to take awhile. In light of recent events, which have informed me that Exodus has to be bad, I'm reading back to see if that allows me to pick out anything from his posts that could be telling.

Exodus wrote:

Avalanche wrote:

Spiral wrote:

The Vision wrote:Considering how many players are in this game, things are awfully quiet…

I, personally, don't have much to say. Avalanche certainly has quieted down, though.

I am pouting because I didn't get my way.

I think it is telling how people are trying to make me out as a villain for having a different opinion about the poll than everyone else. Personally, I will be looking at conformists today.

I thought I understood what you were doing when you were causing chaos, but I thought that was through once you posted this. Unless I am misinterpreting this post and your actions, you've revealed why you were talking about the Morlocks (for reasons such as analyzing reactions, which I can't disagree with). But why is it that you've only really said that you're going to be looking at conformists but have yet to actually give thoughts on the people who have villain-ized you (unless I missed them, please let me know if I have)? Or who are acting as conformists (I don't even know what that means lol). Now you're back to talking about Morlocks, and you never really accomplished what I thought you were out to do. I just don't understand.

I didn't think much of this before, but this could be interpreted as him trying to lead the lynch in a certain direction. Perhaps away from a direction that would make us look at other teammates or himself. And unsurprisingly, he voted for Mojo on Day 1 as basically a throwaway vote. Sounds like a safe/conformist option to me.

Exodus wrote:

Avalanche wrote: Hi there! I am happy to address your post.

First, I was not pushing that option to analyze reactions or anything similar. I was pushing it because I wanted to fight Morlocks. I feel like I could not have been more clear on this point.

Second, by conformists I do not mean the people villainizing me, I mean the people trying to blend in, particularly by voting for the "obvious" choice of school. You want thoughts? I'll give you thoughts.

I feel good about Scarlet Witc, despite her suspicion of me, and I feel good about Dazzler. I feel less good about Havok with a k, because I thought the pronoun thing looked scapegoaty. I haven't formed opinions of the others yet. I am watching.

Thanks for explaining. So you keep mentioning these conformists (which now I have a better understanding of what you mean) and it would not be a bad idea to look into it. But why exactly haven't you? Unless you have after this post, I haven't completely caught up. I saw you say you would be voting for someone who chose the school but again, you're not naming these players which kind of comes across like you don't want to make accusations.

At the same time you're suspecting Havok, though. I don't really agree with this accusation for the time being. The only thing I have noticed is he was very helpful at the beginning (same as Vision, I think it was?) and that could be baddies trying to look helpful and productive but Havok came across genuine to me because it sounded like he is a fan of the flavor/theme.

The most interesting part of this to me is how he is buddying up to Havok (and did so earlier). So either: 1)he's setting Havok up to be a fall-guy later on, or 2)they're teammates. Leaning more towards the second one, but we'll see what else happens as I read along.

Exodus wrote:

Mojo wrote:I was a bit confused in my earlier post about Avalanche and going to the Morlock tunnels. I have revised my opinion a bit on the matter here.

Just read the day 0 posts again and it seems that it was brought up quite a few times that Morlocks aren't necessarily bad guys, as this was pointed out numerous times to Avalanche he just ignored it, or didn't care. As he also ignored the fact that if he really wanted to fight bad guys he would go to where the brotherhoods base is actually located, not to the tunnels to fight some mutants that haven't harmed us.

So I am voting for Avalanche.

What? I am really lost at this vote. You just did a very quick turn around. You said you agreed about looking at conformists, yet ultimately, this decision is the exact opposite. I do not follow this decision. My vote may have just found its place.

I take that back. This wasn't a throwaway vote. This was a very opportunistic vote. Especially considering how many other people were suspicious on Day 1 of Avalanche with the whole Morlocks thing. I know it was a quick turn-around, but outside of that, you could use this logic to justify voting for anyone who voted for Avalanche or considered voting for him.

Edit: Apparently, Mojo had said he re-read and that was what made him change his mind. Maybe Exodus ignored that in favor of an opportunity to potentially toss someone under the bus?

That's it for Day 1. Day 2 is next, but I need to take a quick break. And then I'll be back to posting.

I actually have not felt so great about Exodus myself, but I have to ask. Of the two options you laid out, why are you leaning towards Exodus being my team mate? Have you read through all of Exodus's posts? I would say it is much more likely that Exodus was trying to buddy up to me obviously because I know my alignment is X-Men. But even just reading Exodus's posts would lead me there if I were looking at this from a 3rd party perspective.

This is from Night 2:

Exodus wrote:

Havok wrote:Why is it that people feel good about Mojo? I don't see it. I could understand if you said you felt neutral about him...I don't feel neutral, but I could see how others might arrive at that point..but I certainly don't know why someone would feel "good" about him.

Am I missing something?

I must be missing it too because he has definitely caught my eye and I am puzzled as to how people have such opposing opinions.

and then from day 3:

Exodus wrote:

Havok wrote:vote Quicksilver

I find it interesting that you decided to vote right after I brought up the idea that this was too convenient, and didn't even comment on it.

Exodus wrote:

The Vision wrote:We have almost no time left. You guys have been more on the pulse than me dince I thought I was silenced. Who would make a credible alternate choice?

I am suspicious of Phoenix and Sunfire the most. I also thought Havoks vote was weird because he ignored my idea that all the votes in the same place was too convenient.

Exodus wrote:

Dazzler wrote:Well, if nothing else, I think today has been very interesting and we've got a lot of options to discuss moving forward.

I agree. While last minute things are nerve-wracking, they lead good topics. I'll be up for discussing quite a few things tomorrow, such as Havo(ck?), Cable and Vision

Exodus wrote:

Havok wrote:lol I leave for a few hours and come back to see mayhem happened.

Exodus: I'm not sure what you are trying to get at?

What are you referring to? My post about you? I thought it was weird how when I brought up the idea that it was too convenient for almost all the voters to be voting for the same candidate, you came in and joined them without even taking my post into consideration.

And then after this, Exodus completely drops me as a point of suspicion. It reads to me like Exodus gave up because his attempt to bring suspicion on me failed. So then he goes back to agreeing with me.

So, again, why do you lean towards Exodus and I being team mates?

I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

I read it exactly the same way.

Alright. To save you all a great deal of time. I'm doing the rest of this with links provided to each post. I figure that will save a good chunk of space from all the extra, unnecessary quotes.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62972

Here, he claims that Mojo initially agreed with Avalance about looking into defenders and defended Avalanche, but left himself with enough room to change his mind if need be. I took it simply as Mojo re-reading and gaining a fresh perspective on the situation, or discovering something he hadn't noticed before that convinced him to change his mind. I think Exodus is trying to either fabricate a case or move attention towards Mojo.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62974

I won't go too much into this, because I think Avalanche is good now and I've explained my feelings already, but at the time, I thought he wanted that option to win because he would gain some special ability or get a helpful item from it. But you go so far as to say I was trying to add fuel to the flames. I wasn't trying to start a riot, for crying out loud. Or be chaotic/antagonizing, to use your words.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62978

Not really. I don't think anyone goes into a game wanting to get lynched on Day 1.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62980

"Uh oh. My case against Mojo isn't working out. I'll just say I misunderstood him and move on, and hopefully that drops it since this is still early in the game."

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62983

This (and your following post 2 posts down) was the nail in the coffin for me. I think you were planning on using Mojo to take the fall if Avalanche had gotten lynched. And seeing that fail, you considered trying to direct more attention towards Mojo by fabricating/misinterpreting his thoughts. When that failed as well, you backed off rather wisely. Sounds like pretty scummy behavior to me.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 360#p63038

This makes me wonder if his team was the one who silenced White Queen. It reads to me like a baddie who is trying to casually make a reference to something his team did, but wants to seem like a civvie who is making helpful/observational statements.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p63050

"Oh look! Another victim...I mean person I could cast blame/doubt towards and try to get lynched!"

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p63053

In hindsight now, Quicksilver probably WAS trying to be helpful in his own way. Which makes the 'overly defensive' part seem like a lame excuse to me.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p63064

And here we are jumping around to someone else too. I actually have Thunderbird pegged to a specific person, and if it's the person I think it is, I completely understand the randomized vote.

You know, Exodus, you've been really good so far about jumping around and casting blame, but never fully committing to or sticking to one person for any extended period of time. I'm surprised you went this long before I noticed it.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 440#p63094

So you vote for Thunderbird, and then follow it up with this? I think you're trying to keep the doors open to switching to Quicksilver here, that way if Thunderbird flipped civ, you could come back and say, "Well, I voted for an easy/obvious option. But I'm still looking at Quicksilver!"

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 480#p63142

"Well, got Thunderbird at least. Now back to Quicksilver to make it 3 in a row!"

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 520#p63195

Here, Exodus goes along with someone else and decides to place a safe/non-committal vote on someone who is likely to not win. Sounds like par for the course for you so far.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 520#p63210

Now this REALLY makes me think Havok and Exodus could be teammates. This sounds like the kind of thing one might discuss in baddie BTSC chat. I've had teammates come back and bring up people I was trying to pin blame on and get lynched, after my attempts to do so didn't work (also, Havok votes a non-committal option, which is interesting, but the focus of my case here is on Exodus).

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 600#p63278

Wow, that was gutsy. You actually were willing to place some blame on yourself, but turn it into a (seemingly) good reason to go after Quicksilver.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 600#p63279

So because not a lot of people felt the same way, that means it wasn't "blown out of proportion" and justifies your case? It's easy in mafia to have a small group of people posting the most for a certain period of time. You do realize that, right?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 640#p63332

I could see an interpretation here where someone would believe Exodus' vote was forced here. But if I was a baddie and saw that, I would call it out to the host and ask he be penalized for making that suggestion. Instead though, I think he used this to try and cover himself if QS flipped civ.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 640#p63335

Nevermind. The Exodus being forced thing seems silly after this. You're using it to justify going after another civvie. And no, the baddies seem pretty certain to stick to this one because it's an easy option.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 640#p63336

Too much time with Quicksilver, I guess. Time to jump on to someone else!

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 640#p63345

Why does this make you want to vote Phoenix? Did I miss something here? (Edit: Nevermind. I remember the reasoning behind her now.)

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 640#p63348

I can't tell if this is distancing from a teammate or if you're on different teams and just disagree with him. Seems fishy regardless.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 680#p63358

Going for Phoenix now. Completely drops any mention of Quicksilver.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 680#p63376

Going with the flow again. Your votes I think have all been either that or thrown away on somebody that no one was looking at. This is classic.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 680#p63384

Jumps back to QS. I think this was probably your plan all along.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 680#p63390

Here you are OPENLY ADMITTING THAT YOU WILL GO WITH WHATEVER THE MAJORITY WANTS!!! Scum-hunting my ass. You're so incredibly conformist that you have to be bad. But the worst part for you, Exodus, isn't until the very end.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 720#p63400

So you chastise someone for wasting a vote, which is something you've been very good at this game, and make another plea to try and get QS lynched.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 720#p63409

Herp derp can't incriminate myself by having an original thought herp-a-herp.

I'll also add in all the little posts here and there at the end of the Day 3 from Exodus. Seems like someone trying to make sure the lynch gets led down a certain path.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 720#p63424

I'm still catching up some (haven't read anything from yesterday yet), so I'm interested to see where this goes since you name-dropped Havok in there.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 760#p63433
This is a Havok post, but it makes me re-consider them actually being teammates. I don't think a baddie is likely to make cracks about going after a fellow teammate this early on, especially when that teammate hasn't taken a lot of heat yet. So them being teammates might not be as likely as I originally thought. We'll see though.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 760#p63441

Okay, I was probably wrong about Exodus and Havok being teammates before. I think he was trying to "buddy up" to Havok before. But now it looks like Havok is to be his next victim.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 760#p63451

Anything to get it off of yourself, huh?

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 880#p63596

"You have some good evidence, but I'm still right anyway."

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 880#p63611

You're not really one who is able to go after people who go with the flow. It's fairly hypocritical on your part.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 920#p63614

You know, you then go and post stuff like this, and it makes me unsure again if you and Havok are teammates or not. If I had to pick a side, I would still slightly lean towards buddying up.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 920#p63615

Taking another opportunistic vote here, I see. All because of a single contradiction? You do realize we have another fully day and a bit over to discuss this, right?

Oh wait. You're probably going to "change your mind" again, huh?

I think that I'm caught up for now (on both the game and Exodus). I only have one last piece to add to the puzzle, and maybe that will be enough to convince others that Exodus needs to go.

Take a look back at the Night 1 poll results. Exodus and I both voted for the same option, along with 2 other people (Dazzler and Thunderbird). The other 2 are currently dead. We know Thunderbird was a civ, and I'm fairly certain that Dazzler was now too. Obviously, I can't discuss the information that I got from selecting that book, but with the other 2 out of the picture now, it really, REALLY makes me think Exodus is most likely bad. That's why I wanted to go back and re-read all of his posts. I will be voting for Exodus today, and I would encourage everyone to go back and read everything that I've read as well. I think there's enough damning evidence against Exodus, but I would like others to be able to come to the same conclusion as me.

Unsurprisingly, tons of linki.

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

That wasn't the intent. From some additional info I had, it made me start to think there was a good chance Exodus was bad. But I wanted to go back and re-read him because I felt that, in context, what he was saying would either confirm or eliminate my suspicions of him. In this case, however, it most certainly confirmed it for me.

And before I forget, votes Exodus.

As far as who I will be voting for today, I have a few suspects at the top of my list but I'm not sure which one yet. I still have bad vibes from Mojo. I still don't understand why people felt good enough about him to give him the poll prize...whatever that was. He was pinging me big time before that. And since then, it seems like some have assumed he's good or something based on that poll alone. I don't understand it at all. Also looking at Sunfire, Exodus, Phoenix and Domino. I feel good at the moment Mikhail Rasputin, Hawkeye, The Vision, Deadpool, and Avalanche. Although with Avalanche, I'm starting to lean back towards being on the fence. His recent quietness gives me pause. Everyone else I'm on the fence on right now...no real strong feelings either direction.

Would also like to hear from Bastion, Sebastian Shaw, Cable, and Marrow. Though I think I remember Cable saying he quit.

Linki wow

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

agreed. that's how i read it also.

Havok wrote:

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

agreed. that's how i read it also.

If people feel that way, I can understand. Which is why I would prefer others to read back through what I've come up with, and state their feelings on it, rather than just jump on the "let's lynch Exodus!" train. We've had too many careless lynches so far, and I want this one to be more well-thought out. I've provided a start and my mind is set, but I'm hoping others can come to a similar conclusion as me.

ah, I see now that the info shadowcat was talking about was the day 0 poll stuff.

linki lol

For all practical intents and purposes to everyone else, I would view the "info" stuff about as highly as you view the rest of my case. Because you obviously have no reason to trust me other than my word on the situation. So from here on out, I would just look at it as more evidence that I'm either on the right track or that my case is a load of poo.

Havok wrote:ah, I see now that the info shadowcat was talking about was the day 0 poll stuff.

linki lol

yes, which makes me wonder how exodus feels not only in responding to what Shadowcat has said but also does he have the same feeling about Shadowcat since they both picked the same book and the other two are dead.

linki shadowcat

I have to wait for Exodus' response obviously, but I can see how that last part could be turned on me as well. All I can say for now is that I believe Exodus is bad, and I will continue to vote for him until one of us dies.

I'm also potentially setting myself up as a good NK target from his team with this, but I feel it's well worth the risk if it means we get someone from The Brotherhood lynched.

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

You're not misreading, that's what she said.

Still someone with info is better than we've had so far.

Shadowcat wrote:I have to wait for Exodus' response obviously, but I can see how that last part could be turned on me as well. All I can say for now is that I believe Exodus is bad, and I will continue to vote for him until one of us dies.

I'm also potentially setting myself up as a good NK target from his team with this, but I feel it's well worth the risk if it means we get someone from The Brotherhood lynched.

So it seems you had reason to believe that Exodus is bad before you made your case. Why so? I'm looking through the roles and I'm not finding one that fits that claim. I also don't recall you winning a night poll, so was there some 'heavy manipulation' somewhere?

Ahh, the Day 0 poll. I remember quicksilver had asked people about an option, and someone had replied that it may become useful later on... so this is likely part of that?

Shadowcat, I appreciate what you're trying to do here, but it reminds me a lot of what the Gryffindors tried to do in the HP game; just walk in and hammer the game with obvious "I've got info" stuff. So I'm going to read your case and judge based on that, not on the info insinuation.

Shadowcat wrote:For all practical intents and purposes to everyone else, I would view the "info" stuff about as highly as you view the rest of my case. Because you obviously have no reason to trust me other than my word on the situation. So from here on out, I would just look at it as more evidence that I'm either on the right track or that my case is a load of poo.

And lol at an Xmen character using the phrase "load of poo"...

The Vision wrote:Ahh, the Day 0 poll. I remember quicksilver had asked people about an option, and someone had replied that it may become useful later on... so this is likely part of that?

Shadowcat, I appreciate what you're trying to do here, but it reminds me a lot of what the Gryffindors tried to do in the HP game; just walk in and hammer the game with obvious "I've got info" stuff. So I'm going to read your case and judge based on that, not on the info insinuation.

Ah yes, that game. The Gryffindors had everything right, but no one believed them.

And the moral of that story is... well I haven't come up with one yet.

The Vision wrote:Ahh, the Day 0 poll. I remember quicksilver had asked people about an option, and someone had replied that it may become useful later on... so this is likely part of that?

Shadowcat, I appreciate what you're trying to do here, but it reminds me a lot of what the Gryffindors tried to do in the HP game; just walk in and hammer the game with obvious "I've got info" stuff. So I'm going to read your case and judge based on that, not on the info insinuation.

Which is fine. It's what I'd prefer you do anyway.

@Polaris: Yes, I had a suspicion that he might have been bad. It came from the night poll where we all had to select a book to read in the library (my memory keeps telling me that was Night 1, not Day 0, but oh well). It wasn't until after Dazzler was NKed that I started to think it was more likely, and went back to read up on him again.

I'll be back in a couple of hours. Hopefully we can get some discussion going on this.

It was night 1, I just checked.

rip dazzler and holy hell shadowcat just dropped a bombshell!!! gotta c what exodus has 2 say about this........

Longshot wrote: yes, which makes me wonder how exodus feels not only in responding to what Shadowcat has said but also does he have the same feeling about Shadowcat since they both picked the same book and the other two are dead.

An excellent point.

Exodus wrote: I am suspicious of Phoenix and Sunfire the most. I also thought Havoks vote was weird because he ignored my idea that all the votes in the same place was too convenient.

I decided to do my own readback thru Exodus, because anyone can put whatever slant they want on things if they're a good enough mafia player. More than anything, this post pings me. At no point prior to this post did he ever mention Sunfire. Not once. But in the heat of the last minute chaos, he not only was willing to suddenly switch his vote to Sunfire, but calls him suspicious.

This feels weird to me, and off.

@Exodus, I'm curious about one thing. I don't want you to say your real username or anything, but did you once play mafia at mafiascum? It's important to how I'm reading a certain something about your posts...

Wow, Shadowcat. You have spent a lot of time and have been very helpful today. I know this will sound wishy-washy, but I am changing my vote to Exodus. There is just too much evidence not to.

Shadowcat, I appreciate the insight and post look ups on Exodus. Really helpful info for us to get a lynch right this time

I'll wait until exodus responds before I make up my mind in the case.

I will say though- I did have the thought during the night one poll that the brotherhood would make sure to get a vote on each option in order to maximize their knowledge,

Holy wowza! I'm just going to reply to Spiral for now, but will be back later or tomorrow to try to figure out what's going on. Good to have you back, SC. I haven't gone through everything you've posted, but I must say it looks very interesting. Will get to that as soon as I can, and the other stuff that's been discussed and hopefully we'll get a point of view from Exodus as well.

Spiral wrote: I do not think discussing the secrets of a civvie role is beneficial to the civvies at all. This is not a new opinion. Unless the role has a possible traitor ability.
Even so, it is not novel to think discussing civvie secrets is not intelligent. I don't think it is. Why give the baddies more power? Why give them that knowledge/idea? It's not like your discussion of it helped the civilian cause in any way-- it only gave baddies access to those ideas. I'll repeat again THIS IS NOT A NEW THING. I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP FOR THIS GAME. FLYIN' HIGH HAS BEEN LYNCHED (wrongly) for this.
I do not appreciate the way you turned my shock that someone would discuss the secrets of a civvie role into a reason to suspect me.

First, thanks for finally taking the time to reply. I can see why you'd think discussing a civilian's role is not a good idea, but as I have previously stated, I do not consider that my discussing that endangered any civilians. The role says 'can alter the weather' which is pretty much self explanatory. I would assume that a team of 7 have discussed this already, and there are civilians who might not pay too much attention to the roles and just skip through the posts and might find that helpful. The main purpose of that post was to discuss the independents, because at the time, QS would have preferred to choose the potential independent over the potential baddie, and while I was at it, I decided to look at all the roles with secrets. Of course I thought about it, especially after the Havok incident where one of the most important civilians could have been exposed, but I considered that discussing it would not endanger any civilian and might help us see the bigger picture and to better understand the game mechanics. What we have here, is us disagreeing on a certain matter: you consider that discussing the civilians' secrets is bad in general. I think it depends. Now the fact that you don't have the same opinion as I do, does not necessarily make you bad. It was your tone which to me seemed aggressive, self-righteous, not sincere, and an attempt to set me up. That might not have been the case, but that is how I perceived it, and thus, have retaliated the way I did, which might not have been the best approach.

Spiral wrote: I don't know what you want me to say about this? You chastised me for daring to question you. I think your reasons for "suspecting" me for this are shitty. I think you accused me of being bad simply because I dared say, "wtf" to you. I do not see anything wrong with what I said to you, but I see everything wrong with what you did: WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU OPENLY DISCUSS THE SECRETS OF A CIVILIAN ROLE? What benefit did it give anyone???????

If you're looking for me to have a change of heart on this-- it's not happening. You condemned me for questioning you, and then you were extremely condescending (so I don't want to hear bullshit about me causing you to act in any way). "I like to rely on logic"
Cool!

I did not suspect you because you dared to question me. Everyone is free to question whomever they want, I am no exception. I suspected you firstly for the reasons stated above, and then for your reply which ignored my arguments and focused strictly on the fact that I dared to suspect you. I hope I'm making sense. I do not expect you to have a change of heart. As a matter of fact that would be suspicious as hell and I'd vote for you on the spot.

Spiral wrote:#1) I brought up Mystique because YOU asked why I hadn't commented on the other role(s) you discussed. The other roles you discussed were not civilian roles, so I saw no reason not to discuss them. I was not trying to insinuate anything by pointing out Mystique, only that the other roles you discussed were not civilian and I felt no need to mention them on that basis. However, you conveniently ignored this and told me I was bad for doing so.

It's because you singled out Storm, because, now I know, you think that discussing civilian roles is bad for them. But you didn't mention that discussing Mistique doesn't do the baddies any good, or that discussing Apocalypse and his potential horsemen recruits from all the groups might stir some shit in the baddie chat if one of them is recruited and thus a traitor, and indirectly, possibly beneficial to the civilians. Ignoring more than half of my posts' content, the aggressive way in which you first questioned me, reads as a baddie who can afford to act this way because they know they have a strong team behind them.

Spiral wrote:What would you even like me to respond to, Hawkeye, because it seems to me that you just want me to say that I'm bad. I am not. You don't have points against me, you have complaints. You don't have a case against me that I can respond to because everything you're saying is just "I do not like your tone" or "Why did you ask me this" with an aire of "I am smarter than you". So, Hawkeye, please, tell me, why am I bad? Am I bad because I thought you discussing secret civvie roles was obtuse? Am I bad because I thought Quicksilver was bad? Am I bad because I didn't like how I thought the original Rasputin was trying to seem like a civvie not paying attention? Or am I bad because it is convenient for you to say so?

I just want to hear from you so I can form a proper opinion. I too thought QS was bad and pushed for his lynch, probably more than you did, and I was very wrong. I don't want that to happen again. I don't want you lynched for the sake of having you lynched regardless of your alignment. I wanted you as an alternative to QS, in case Magneto interfered there, because with all the info I had from you at the time, and not taking into consideration the fact that you could have been silenced, I considered that you were bad. The only way to set this straight is if we discuss things. Yes, I was douchey, hopefully not anymore.

ewww I smelled info dump from across the interwebz.

I will read SC's case on it's own merits and follow the links and read things in context before judging and voting. Not sure I liked how Deadpool, Sunfire, Domino, Mojo and Polaris jumped on it without adding their own thoughts to what was posted. All claimed it was interesting /good points/ good case wonder why they couldn't at least said what was the part that made them agree with it?
TBF two said they would wait to hear a response before voting, I hope they do as we still have time.

And after the way the last lynch went down we could definitely use more discussion early not the last half hour before lynch end. That way we can avoid some of the confusion that would ensue.

Domino wrote:Exodus you're alignment seems to be clear for your Baddie team. Everyone read Professor X's hint and you automatically try to throw the wool on people's eyes to get suspicion off her and onto me. Then, you vote for me followed by your teammate Sunfire. THAT is what I find interesting. If you were Civ I feel like you wouldn't be scrambling, especially this early when votes aren't due and already try to get someone else in the light that is Civ. After all, you campaigned well against QS to make sure attention stayed on him, why not try it on me as well now to save a Teammate of yours?

I never tried to take suspicion off of Sunfire. I found your posts to be clearly contradicting and that is a major way in which I scum hunt. Where does Professor X's role says he has power to find a baddie? No where. If Professor X had an actual power to find a baddie then I could see how your case could hold some kind of value, but he doesn't. At least not from my understanding, I even mentioned needing to check to see if he had a power to alignment check or if it was just an announcement aspect where a player goes based off their interpretations, which I've seen before. I was never scrambling, and I was never dead set on lynching you either but put my vote where I felt it belonged for the time being. You can change your votes and that is what I intended to do, if I felt it to be necessary. And I did not even campaign against QS making sure attention stayed on him, I was one of those who said it felt weird that all the votes were on him and there was no division, and I said it first. So clearly, you're either not reading the thread properly or you've decided to do whatever you can to make me look bad, and I'm guessing it's the latter.

Domino wrote:But to answer your question about Phoenix so you don't continue to throw attention back on me for not answering you and avoid you and Sunfire's attention: I felt like I was unsure when I first posted about Phoenix. Phoenix posted back after that and sounded very emotional and used the same line QS did about how "we will loose another Civ if she goes" and I didn't find that genuine. I was on the fence about her, but looking back at when she does actually post, she doesn't give much to me to now say I get Civ Vibes from her, especially the last post I just mentioned. I think the 3 I am looking at that I have a very good feeling are bad now are Sunfire, Phoenix, and Exodus. If you don't agree with me, oh well. But I'm most likely listening to the clue and voting Sunfire out first.

But you're rewriting what happened. My suspicion was not the opinion change, it was the fact that you tried to give off the impression that you were suspicious of her from the beginning by saying "I still think they are both bad". There is nothing that suggest new evidence from Phoenix's posts made you think she was bad, you wrote it as if it was there the entire time when it clearly wasn't.
And you're accusing me of trying to scramble and get votes off of Sunfire when you are the one who said it could be a reference to Phoenix. So that makes no sense.